New Delhi: Time Magazine did the unthinkable on Sunday. It called Prime Minister Manmohan Singh 'The Underachiever', flaying him and his government, the UPA-II for failing to act at a time when India's growth was slowing down.

Questioning Singh and the UPA's policies, Time said the PM, appointed so by Congress President Sonia Gandhi despite never having fought and won an election, was "a man in shadow".

Criticising the PM for his "unwillingness to carry out reforms", the magazine said that the PM "wasted the past three years". It also questioned his ability to manage the Finance portfolio following Pranab Mukherjee's exit.

Interestingly, in a previous article in March this year, the magazine had a cover story on Gujarat CM Narendra Modi, and while it lauded him for his development work across the state, the article questioned his Prime Minsiterial ambitions.

Meanwhile, criticising the UPA, the magazine said, "The laws that could help create growth and jobs are stuck in Parliament, sparking concerns that politicians have lost the plot in their focus on short-term populist measures that will win votes."

After Time published this, one of the Gujarati newspaper Divyabhaskar published article names "Manmohan Singh defeat Modi on Time Magazine"
But after some users commented on article that this is misleading they changed it.

NEW YORK: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who has long been lauded for his pivotal role in liberalising the Indian economy, has been dubbed as an "underachiever" by a top US magazine which says he appears "unwilling to stick his neck out" on reforms that will put the country back on growth path.

79-year-old Singh is featured on the cover of Time magazine's Asia edition, which will be out next week. With his portrait in the background, the title on the cover reads 'The Underachiever - India needs a reboot'.

Is Prime Minister Manmohan Singh up to the job?' Time's report titled 'A Man in Shadow' asks, adding that apart from facing the challenges of a slowdown in economic growth, huge fiscal deficit and a falling rupee, India's Congress party-led UPA coalition "has found itself fending off corruption scandals and accused of showing a lack of economic direction."

"....investors at home and abroad are beginning to get cold feet. Voters too are losing confidence, as rising inflation and a litany of scandals chip away at the government's credibility," the magazine said.

Pointing towards Singh's fall "from grace," the magazine said, "in the past three years, the calm confidence he (Singh) once radiated has been absent. He seems unable to control his ministers and -- his new, temporary portfolio at the finance ministry notwithstanding -- unwilling to stick his neck out on reforms that will continue the process of liberalisation he helped start."

The magazine said at a time when India cannot afford a slowdown in economic growth, "laws that could help create growth and jobs are stuck in Parliament, sparking concerns that politicians have lost the plot in their focus on shorter-term, populist measures that will win votes."

Congress on Sunday countered the "underachiever" remark against Prime Minister Manmohan Singh made on the cover of TIME magazine's Asia edition saying what the UPA has achieved under his leadership is by no stretch of imagination "under achievement".

"In the past eight years the UPA government headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has provided political stability, social harmony, internal cohesion, economic growth and a greater role in global affairs. This by no stretch of imagination is under achievement," party spokesperson Manish Tewari said.
His remarks came in response to questions on the TIME magazine's Asia edition featuring 79-year-old Singh on its cover, whose title, with his portrait in the background, reads 'The Underachiever - India needs a reboot'.

The issue of the magazine, which will be out next week, says Singh appears "unwilling to stick his neck out" on reforms that will put the country back on growth path.

Taking potshots at the Prime Minister on the issue, oppsoition BJP pointed out a "sharp contrast" between the way the Time looked upon Singh and Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi, who was also featured in the magazine some time back.

"While a story on Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi was that he meant business and gave a message of prosperity, security, infrastructure development and progress to the country specially people of Gujarat, the other Indian who has been featured is Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who is giving a message of despair, disillusionment, corruption, leaderless economy and downslide of Indian rupee," said BJP leader Tarun Vijay.

However, the Congress spokesperson refused to comment on the comparison being made by the BJP between the two descriptions.

A Congress leader speaking on the condition of anonymity, however, tersely said, "We have no intention of comparing Manmohan Singh and Narendra Modi."

The role of Yashwant Sinha, in unleashing the liberalisation of Indian economy is sadly ignored.

For people who have worked in the Finance Ministry know that Yashwant Sinha, the Finance Minister in the Chandra Shekhar Govt. had already prepared a set of measures for the reform of the economy under guidelines of the IMF. The Govt. collapsed due to the Congress Pulling the plug on the Govt., and in the elections Manohan Singh was made the FM by Narsimha Rao. Based on the inside story the reforms unleashed by MMS were just dusted off proposals of Sinha.

Noted economist Bibek Debroy ( the one who got kicked out of Rajiv Gandhi foundation , for releasing a report praising development in Gujarat, under the one who must not be named), has asimilar take on MMS, albiet almost 18 months back.

To put it mildly, the economy is in a shambles now. Reforms most likely are on permanent pause. The sound and fury over FDI in retail amounted to nothing. During UPA-I, we had RTI and NREG. The rest was a legacy. During UPA-II, we have Right to Education and may have Right to Food. As a reformer, lauded by the external world and urban India, I doubt MMS will be proud of this legacy.

But should we be surprised? We have conjured up an image of MMS as the original reforming FM. There are several problems with this identification. First, MMS wasn't PV Narasimha Rao's original choice as FM. IG Patel was, though that is neither here nor there. Second, the credit for those reforms should largely go to Rao, though the Congress conveniently chose to ignore this later. Indeed, MMS also distanced himself from Rao, though that too is perhaps neither here nor there, except that it reveals some of MMS' personal attributes. The point is, any FM in 1991 would have had to introduce those reforms. The agenda was known. The blueprint was known.

All of these had been firmed up by the end of 1990. All that remained was for FM to read out the speech. MMS wasn't the engineer or the architect. At best, he was the contractor.

Third, MMS may have been an economist once. But for years and years, he was a laterally inducted bureaucrat. A requisite characteristic of a successful bureaucrat is lack of conviction, economic, political or ideological.You need to be malleable.

And MMS was successful at that. It isn't generally known that the "garibi hatao" slogan was thought of by MMS. Therefore, we have ourselves conjured up this 'father of reforms' image and MMS chose to go along.

Part of the image also concerns honesty. Honesty is a relative expression. I have been severely reprimanded by an MP for calling MPs and politicians dishonest. I have been advised to call them differently honest and there is a grain of truth in that.

There is absolutely no question that MMS is personally honest in pecuniary matters. I have plenty of anecdotes on this and so do all those who have interacted with him.

But have you heard of House No. 3989, Nandan Nagar, Ward No. 51, Sarumataria? You probably haven't. This is in Dispur and MMS is ostensibly a tenant there.That's because he is a Rajya Sabha MP from Assam. As I said, honesty is a relative term and I know of people who would baulk at this deception.

There is an anecdote in Yashwant Sinha's book about how MMS had brought alone a file to Chandra Shekhar, who was then the PM, but had already resigned. The file concerned MMS' appointment as UGC boss.

As Chandra Shekhar had already resigned as PM, he pointed out that he couldn't morally sign the file. MMS retorted that he had backdated the file. Since this anecdote has gone uncontested, it is presumably true.

Therefore, if non-pecuniary transactions are involved, I have never been convinced MMS places a premium on "honesty". It is for an individual to decide whether he feels comfortable looking at himself in the mirror.

Well certainly underachiver does hold atleast for the last 2 years or so. Underachiver in the sense that so much more was expected of a stronger UPAII. Does anyone have the entire article available as I can't seem to find it anywhere.

You can't really compare governing Gujarat with governing India. Modi has a 2/3 majority in assembly and doens't have to worry about any oppostion from coalition partners. At centre, not only do don't have a 2/3 majority, You don't even have a simple majority in the Rajya Sabha to just pass simple bills. At the same you have the magic of "coalition compulsions" to take care of. There there is the centre-state tussles that have to be taken care of when implementing any projects or treaties on the ground.

But given the dimal movement of the executive even; there is certainly a need for a reboot. If after the Presidential elections as well the GoI doesn't do anything to improve the situation, then forget the high we had in 2010 when we grew faster than China for the first time in GDP growth; we will probably end up with slower economic growth than 2011.

Well certainly underachiver does hold atleast for the last 2 years or so. Underachiver in the sense that so much more was expected of a stronger UPAII. Does anyone have the entire article available as I can't seem to find it anywhere.

You can't really compare governing Gujarat with governing India. Modi has a 2/3 majority in assembly and doens't have to worry about any oppostion from coalition partners. At centre, not only do don't have a 2/3 majority, You don't even have a simple majority in the Rajya Sabha to just pass simple bills. At the same you have the magic of "coalition compulsions" to take care of. There there is the centre-state tussles that have to be taken care of when implementing any projects or treaties on the ground.

But given the dimal movement of the executive even; there is certainly a need for a reboot. If after the Presidential elections as well the GoI doesn't do anything to improve the situation, then forget the high we had in 2010 when we grew faster than China for the first time in GDP growth; we will probably end up with slower economic growth than 2011.

Click to expand...

Underachieving, in the manner it is being stated, would not mean that one has failed to live up to the euphoric expectations of the UPA I.

There is a school of thought that UPA I rode the good work that it inherited from the previous govt, since the gestation of good policies takes time and it showed up during UPA I. That is the similar argument that Modi rode high because of the good work of the previous govt before he took over. Though unlike UPA I, Modi II is still riding high, while UPA II is a certified disaster.

In the context that â€˜underachievingâ€™ is being mentioned, it would be closer in meaning that given the â€˜windows of opportunityâ€™, UPA II was so bereft of leadership that such opportunities were not seized, resulting in a poor and even abysmal performance. That the Govt has dithered and run its drunken course like a rudderless ship, with the Captain sleeping on the Bridge leaving everything to God, is so evident. I take it that he is God fearing and does seek the Almightyâ€™s guidance as would a pious man like him would! But leaving everything to God would be blatantly unfair on God!

Even the diehard supporters of the Congress have not been able to disprove that there is a total policy paralysis, leaving the governance totally moribund and the Govt appearing to be gripped in its death throes! It obviously has nothing to do with the Parliamentary process.

That the UPA does not have majority in the Rajya Sabha is a pathetic excuse. It got the Nuclear Bill through which was initially opposed by a large majority including those supporting the Govt from within and without the UPA. It merely proves that the Congress has abdicated its political will to govern resolutely to achieve results.

That lack of political will is what surprises me, given Renuka Chaudryâ€™s and Tiwariâ€™s (IIRC) assertion that they have a thumping mandate from the people and that the Nation has faith in them! I am not too sure if Indians are daft that they have faith in incompetence, dithering and total imbecilic governance, caused by abject policy paralysis and direction.

Then again, the argument that the Govt is moribund because of a lack of majority in the Rajya Sabha.

What has majority in the Rajya Sabha got to do with the numerous scams that the Congress majority in Govt, with its own PM, directed by the Super Monitor and Director, Sonia Gandhi, taking place and maturing to a state of an overripe mango?

What has it to do with the pathetic attempts by the Govt to fudge the truth through Kapil Sibal that there was no scam and no loss to the Govt in the 2G? What has it to do with Pranab Mukherjee, now that he has resigned to become the President, being the villain of the piece, as propounded by paid journalists? The PM was the Prisoner of Zenda? Or was he totally an incompetent Lambert the sheepish Lion? Which PM in Indian history has been so brazen as to blame all errors in governance to his Ministers and taking no blame himself? Is he a Duck where the water slips off the back? Maybe a Lame Duck. Even if he isn't, his Govt is!

What stopped the Govt to ensure that Kalmadi does not undertake the biggest thievery of the time? Why is Sheila Dixit going scot free when others are indicted? Why, inspite of 2G, there is this Coalgate? What has all these issues to do with majority in the Rajya Sabha?

The issue is not Coalition Dharma. That is another pitiable excuse. The Congress has taken policy decisions and then informed the Coalition partners, as if they were not of consequence. That is a sureshot way to get their backs up, and anyway, that is hardly how a Coalition works.

Further, if for the Presidential elections, the Congress can hand out largesse to States and get them to distance themselves/ split from their Coalitions, then that shows political will, even if not quite ethical. But then when was politics based on ethics?

Surely, this political will could also be shown to pass Bills by splitting them from their Coalitions. Therefore, this Coalition dharma excuse or that of the lack of majority in the Rajya Sabha is totally bogus and disingenuous. Even their own partners in the UPA played truant and Lâ€™Enfant Terrible! They cannot even control their partners or have the courage to throw them out and damn the consequences.

There are many who are not fond of the BJP for good reasons. But they are not also fond of the sleight of hand, rampant corruption, and above all, deceit.

Everyone is aware that there is corruption in India and is practically reconciled to this regretful fact. However, they were not aware of the magnitude! The 2G, CWG, the scale of Black Money abroad, the fraud in defence deals (now these deals are opened up like the floodgates since they feel that the present military dispensation are pliable to their devious ways) etc! This having been exposed was the proverbial straw that broke the camelâ€™s back! Such thievery and yet, the Govt has no shame and instead continues to increase the tax burden on the public and let prices run wild so brazenly!

And worse still, is the attempt to fudge, obfuscate, pull wool over the eyes when the facts were so clear to see and those fact being endorsed by the very Govt agencies that they control, and which apparently was thoroughly ticked off with the magnitude of fraud being perpetuated in the name of governance.

This web of lies, fudging and obfuscating is what has got the publicâ€™s goat â€“ that indicates the Govt takes the public for granted and more so, that the public to be a swarm of total imbeciles and cretins beyond an iota of intelligence and analysis!

The manner they have fooled the Anna Hazare Team is another case in point of skulduggery and chicanery. There are many who are not too enamoured by Hazare and his ilk, but deceitful ways to curb them is also not laudable and instead has given ground to having sympathy with the Hazare Team.

No sir, not only is the PM an underachiever, he has not shown any sign of Leadership qualities.

Worse is that on his watch, his Govt has proved to be deceitful and even in cohorts with the rampant thieving at the cost of the taxpayer, who continue to bear the burden of their misdeed by being taxed heavier by the year!

Malvika Singh
The shrill, angry cry of protest against the Time magazine cover story on Manmohan Singh that labelled him an â€œunderachieverâ€ is predictable and childish. The story is matter of fact, devoid of any frills and tells it like it is. The defensive reaction by government and Congress party spokespersons only emphasizes and reaffirms that all is not right. It proves that the story hit a raw nerve. It is true that Indiaâ€™s economy is floundering â€” corruption is rampant, good leadership is non-existent and roll-backs have become the norm. There is no determined, cohesive agenda for India. This needs immediate correction if the freefall is to be stalled. Therefore, the vehement reaction from the Congress is unwarranted and a waste of time.

There is no running away from the fact that a frightening breakdown has triggered a profound sense of gloom. The rot is deep and difficult to address without engaging with the people and finding out how they have been affected by bad governance. It will require a truly strong and committed political will to begin a restoration of dignity in all aspects of ordinary life. The signal and action for change must come from the top. Bureaucrats must be given a time frame within which to work, and must be made accountable. The illness is chronic, but because it does not affect the daily lives of the pampered and privileged political and administrative classes, there is neither concern nor an attempt to address it.

The Centre will have to bear the brunt of Indiaâ€™s pathetic condition. It is a government that could have reinvented and restored the apparatus of good governance, but chose not to. It did not amend redundant laws and acts. Almost every move by the Centre in the recent past has been misguided and borne out of bad judgment â€” be it the annual budget or its chosen candidate for the post of president, the highest office in the land. Indians are embarrassed and distraught by the governmentâ€™s mismanagement of affairs and its disregard for integrity and civility. Its boorish, overpowering intrusion at every level of social activity has angered the nation. The silence is bound to explode and disturb the comfort zone of the ruling class sooner rather than later.

Grave disconnect

The Union law minister, Salman Khurshid, was at his candid best when he spoke recently about the the absence of a cohesive vision or any â€œideological directionâ€ in the young leaders of the Congress. His statements were followed by the usual vitriolic response from the party. The media made the most of this, and the Opposition grabbed the opportunity to work the situation to its advantage. Following the backlash, Khurshid, instead of standing by what he said, suggested that his statements were misinterpreted.

The reality is that there is no communication or engagement either among party members within the Congress or between the Congress and other parties at the Centre. The government also shares no connect with the people â€” there is hardly any healthy dialogue on ideas, goals, or political, social and economic positions on national and regional issues. This is not how a democracy works. The system is unimpressive and feudal in spirit; it is insular, disconnected and corrupt, and cannot help in creating an energetic, creative India.

Who will bell the cat and take charge of the nationâ€™s future? How long will the frail, old and infirm, with the same redundant ideas, control Indiaâ€™s destiny? When will a failed administration be held accountable for its actions? Why can our politicians not behave like leaders and statesmen, with their heads held high? It is time that the simple dignities of life were made accessible to all Indians. When will hollow political rhetoric give way to action on the ground?

It appears that the media (and Telegraph is a pro Congress paper) is finally emerging from the grips of sycophancy that has befooled the country since ages.

Khurshed seems to have set the ball rolling. One is observing with bated breath is his head will be soon rolling.

I saw the NDTV discussion on the book of Shashi Thaoor, which too seems to be taking pot shots and what was interesting was that Khurshed, Jaswant Singh and others too did some friendly ribbing over the Khurshed and Rahul cameo role issue.

There is no doubt some serious introspection is required within the Congress if it is to remain relevant.

Malvika Singh articulates this issue very lucidly and as a Congress well wisher, her agony is so persistent.

If the dream team was responsible for the economic growth between 2004 and 2008 they are responsible for the fall between 2008 and now.

Economic policy formulation is certainly a challenging task, but made much more complex by economists. Let me elaborate. Economics is all about production. Production must lead to consumption. Consumption must be below production to ensure sufficient savings. Savings must lead to investment and finally investment must ensure production.

And should there be an imbalance (where one of the components is in deficit or believe me, even in excess) in one of these four components, economists believe that they can intervene to restore the balance through policy formulations. Put pithily, restoring natural order between these four pillars of modern economics is at the core of economic policy formulation and subsequent management.

But aren't markets supposed to it all by itself where excess or deficit in at once taken care by market forces i.e. without the intervention of such policies in the first place? Well if that be so, why do economists arrogate to formulating economic policies for all of us in the first place while simultaneously talk about the supremacy of markets? It is time someone explains why governments labour so much to fashion market friendly economic policies?

Yet, you have investment rules, exchange rate mechanisms, taxation policies, deficit management, interest rates and a host of other economic policies devised by economists who sincerely believe that even to this day that any modern economy can be managed by such interventions.

More importantly, these economic policies over a period of time get translated in to modern commercial laws. That explains why we have laws to manage exchange rates, competition, secutrities market and several other related issues. What is lost in the melee is that economically illiterate judges often end up interpreting fuzzy economic policies reduced by not so intelligent law makers into dense legal language and explained by loquacious lawyers!

But fundamentals do not change, do they?

Yet there are certain fundamentals in economics that have stood the ravages of policy formulations by economists over a period of time. For instance, economists have come to more or less unanimous in their conclusion that it is impossible to maintain fixed exchange rate, allow free movement of capital and independent monetary policy.

Let me explain. When forex inflows surge, the central bank of the country is compelled to release domestic currency in to the local markets. This leads to inflation which in turn leads to higher interest rates. Similarly, it is impossible to have a surge in forex outflows and a stable exchange rate. Under this scenario, the domestic currency is more often than not, found to depreciate.

The balancing of these three factors all at once remains at the core of economic management. Colourfully, it is explained as an "impossible trinity" or a "trilemma." It is often said governments at best can meet the imperial demands of two of the three factors listed above, but not all of them simultaneously.

Paul Krugman puts it brilliantly: "The point is that you can't have it all: A country must pick two out of three. It can fix its exchange rate without emasculating its central bank, but only by maintaining controls on capital flows (like China today); it can leave capital movement free but retain monetary autonomy, but only by letting the exchange rate fluctuate (like Britain - or Canada); or it can choose to leave capital free and stabilize the currency, but only by abandoning any ability to adjust interest rates to fight inflation or recession (like Argentina today).

Explaining the policy issues that need to be tackled on account of foreign capital flows, the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, stated in 2007, "The management of capital flows is a complex process encompassing a spectrum of policy choices, which inter alia, include: the appropriate level of reserves; monetary policy objectives related to liquidity management and interest rates; and maintenance of healthy financial market conditions with financial stability."

Equally it is impossible to have the opposite - high rates of inflation, depreciating currency and falling forex reserves. Yet, that is what India is witnessing in recent nonths - forex reserves that are continuing to fall, the exchange rate that is continuously depreciating by the hour and of course extraordinarily high rates of inflation. How did we manage the impossible trinity albeit in the reverse?

Nobel for the team !

MS on top of PC - that is how one of the leading pink papers ran its headline when the economic deam team comprising of Dr Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister and P Chidambaram as finance minister took office in 2004. The fact the headlines also punned on Montek Singh (MS) being appointed as the deputy chairman of the Planning Commission (PC) was lost on some.

Much water has flown since then. P Chidambaram is stuck with 2G scam. Pranab Mukherjee's nomination to presidentiship is seen more as reward for non-performance than anything else. Mr. Kaushik Basu (who seems to be more a cheerleader for multinational retail gaints rather then an advisor to the Governmnet of India) and Dr C Rangarajan (who frankly has offered precious little) are all seen as rusted, tired and waiting to be retired. Montek Singh on whom much was expected has been another failure.

Eight years later this dream team of the PM and his team have very little to show. When the growth rate between 2004 and 2008 was up these very people patable themselves on their back. They credited themselves for this growth little realizing that the economic growth rate achieved by them was actually on account of a robust global growth. Now that the Indian growth story is floundering, they blame it on global factors!

Height of intellectual dishonesty, I would say. But there is something deeply flawed in all these arguments. Let me demonstrate.

The entire paradigm was succinctly captured by Shankar Acharya in his Working Paper titled India's Macroeconomic Performance and Policies since 2000 wherein he states, "From 2002-03 to 2007-08, India experienced a sustained and unprecedented surge in net foreign capital inflows, which soared ten-fold from $10.8 billion in 2002-03 to$108 billion in 2007-08."

He goes on to add "The surge was particularly strong in the two years between 2005-06 and 2007-08, when net inflows jumped four-fold from $25 billion to $108 billion." Remember these were boom years for the Indian economy and its correlation to the Forex flows near perfect.

The net impact - rupee was relatively stable while forex reserves rose from $76 billion in March 2003 to $310 billion in March 2008, with nearly $160 billion being added in 06-07 and 07-08. And even then inflation remained elevated, government economists explained it as the impact of the "impossible trinity."

All this was simply not because global investors were enmoured about Dr Singh and his wonderful team, but such huge forex flows was obviously because of excess global liquidity. And now that has dried up, forex flow into India too has dried up. No wonder the Time magazine has dubbed the PM as underachiever - in my considered opinion the understatement of the decade.

That is not all. Manufacturing is in doldrums. Business confidence is at all time low. Infrastructure has virtually gone broke. Farmers suicides are an accepted way of life with India slipping everyday in the Human Development Index. The morale of the government officers is completely shattered with the citizenry seem to be scam fatigued. Nothing seems to surprise us or shock us any more.

What is worrying is that the standard response to any scam by the PMO is that the PM was "completely in the dark" as if the PM were some rodent or an insect. How can the PM of the country be always in the dark? Can someone lead him to light please? Crucially can the PM communicate if not lead? Can he express his constraints?

Now when rupee has depreciated substantially, forex exchange has come down by close to $40 billiothen a matter of few months and inflation continues to be elevated, theoretical economists are puzzled in the context of their understanding of our economics. Even in war torn economies we have not witnessed such an economic paradigm as we are currently witnessing in India.

The final question: If exchange rates have depreciated by 20 per cent why is that foreign investors are not finding India attractive even now? The answerexpecting question is obviously Dr. Singh and his team. At least for this reason Dr Singh and his team deserve the Nobel.

PS: So if the dream team was responsible for the economic growth between 2004 and 2008 they are responsible for the fall between 2008 and now. In the alternative if global factors are responsible for the economic downturn since 2008, then it is the very same global factors that is responsible for the sustained growth of the Indian economy between 2004 and 2008. Either way time to bid good bye to Dr. Singh and his team.

The author is a Chennai-based chartered accountant. Comments can be sent to [email protected]